ARCHIVED REPORTS XR0012546 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I 4 s �x Fac No.2070-2 19 December 1991 -- PIp ` well was allowed to recharge. A um was stopped and the pumped um in well. pumping test, the p p computerized data logger was used to continuously record the recharge �hevobs rvaation welts. A handheld groundwater probe was used to measure the recharg z n RFSL3LT5 QF�iNVESTIGATI N 3.1 :subsurface Soil'Profile ed an e to be determined. Figure 7 illustrates a lithologic cross Extrapolation of data obtained during Ll1i advancement of loll borings 90-1 and 90 cross section,lclay interpretation of the subsurface soil prof to the lit'lofagic section for the areas ns- near the 1981 tank excavations. According the 1987 tank and silt comprise the majority of the subsurfaceoS sand also 1 in the, 'exist tin the vicinity dank fors forthe Several discontinuous and pinchd-Out' 1e+s excavations. This corresponds closely to subsurface conditions noted in the baring 8 entire area of this investigation. ~^. 3.2 IAcal Groundwater- Well Influence Survey within 2,000 feet of the Rainbo of groundwater we!!s located We conducted a ,research survey ert wells. According to documents Bakery to determin. their possible influence on the subject;Res Y three veils existed within a at the time.of out investigation. to a depth f 217 feet on file with the State of California Department of Water Resources, three wells wele 2,00 feet radius of G'te Rainbakery see figure 8). Well A was Su depth of 220 feet in 1963 for irrigation located south of the subject property Purposes. in 1960 for irrigation purposes. Well B was Installed to a dep Well C was installed to a depth of 94 feet in 1949 for irrigation a are bath purposes. ifer a approximately 2.20 feet below the surface identifytheAccording to this survey, ti-,a two wells in closest proximity to the object prop pumping from a deep aquifer pP A wells. Although we feel that these wells,under norlral approximately 150 feet deeper than the Rainbo Bak.ry while shallow enough screened interval of Ghesuldw a4tt. fifuence thethe well iRaislbo Bakery evells.e WulhCaway s as to minimally pumpinfi conditions, Should p cars to be far i; to potentially influence the Rainbo Bakery w-lis,2ppcarditions. t influence the subject property wel+s ander normal pumping ' Result-' 3.3 Soil Analytical Laboratory for the presence. of tato! site AVO's) and lead as per Soil samples obtained from the Ra omaticke vYolatile were organ organics nrJyz{d Water Quality Control �. petroleum hydrocarbons {T E, guidelines published by the Regional W Q recommendations in the Tri-Regional g results tar the sail sarrinies obtained at the where the soil samples were obtained and their Board. Table I s Figuret 9 ilt str,test.healocatianaory tcal laboratory results for the soil subject property. corresponding contaminant concelarations. Copiea of the ana:yt II� samples are included as Appendix Vlll. I ; ANDERSON CONSULTING GROUP